Scores and Comments

19.c.ps.114.463

Creation Art Center Corporation

Application Details

Proposal TypeGeneral Program Support - Discipline-Based
Request Amount
$35,000
Total Score525.000
Average Score87.500

Panelist Scores

Panelist Excellence Impact Management Accessibility Total
Dohrman Kimberly 32 25 17 9 83
Gunter Ben 37 27 15 8 87
Kolenic Anthony 34 27 18 7 86
Mitchell Susan 35 28 16 7 86
Moore Regina
Schlehr Aimee 34 24 18 9 85
Winter Pioneer 40 30 19 9 98

Comments

Dohrman Kimberly - Score: 83.000
{No comments provided.}
Gunter Ben - Score: 87.000

I couldn't find your website; Wix told me the domain wasn't connected to a site yet.  Since the website is mentioned in your marketing plan, it was a real disappointment not to find it.

Your mission statement is moving, and connects well to your programming.

Proofreading errors make your goals harder to grasp.  There is unnecessary repetition in the narrative that describes programming.  This distracts from your story.

The price structure for your programming is inspiring.

Thank you for making it clear that you intend to reach across language barriers through music and graphic arts.

It makes sense for you to survey your audience in Spanish -- thanks for making that clear.  Your evaluation plan depends heavily on press coverage and reviews.  Are you getting consistent press, that you trust to review you?  No press clippings turn up in your support materials.

There are many big changes from year to year in your budget -- for example, on lines 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 12, and 18.  Adding budget notes to explain these swings would show your management in a better light.

Thank you for making it clear that you are working both to preserve the integrity of your historic site and to make it accessible.  When will the ramp to the Gallery be completed?  

 

Kolenic Anthony - Score: 86.000

E: Clear activities, but goals and objectives are not specifically tied to the activities; great partnerships but not clear what those partnerships enable/make possible for this organization; timeline is a cleaner, trimmer version of the activities section.

 

I: Appropriate opportunity to individual ratio; the narrative portion of this section is general and appears to be more focused on the organization's value than on the impacts envisioned for the 18-19 year for the community/audience in question.

 

M: Reporting to DCA has improved year over year; working toward sustainability - in progress; evaluation is present and seems to suggest elements that should have been present in the goals/objectives portion of the application.

 

A: Despite historic limitations of the facility, some - but only some - compliance issues have been addressed.

Mitchell Susan - Score: 86.000

It would have been helpful to have a more precise explanation of the educational, economic, and cultural impact of the programming. 

I would suggest that you update your website more frequently.

Moore Regina - Score: 0
{No comments provided.}
Schlehr Aimee - Score: 85.000
No specific goals or objectives included, just activities. Would like to see more input as to impact to the community- economic, social, programmatic to the community. 
Winter Pioneer - Score: 98.000
Excellent project budget breakdown. Very visible in the community with a broad range of activities.